I mentioned after the Thanksgiving holiday weekend that one of the books I began reading was The Dyer’s Hand by W. H. Auden. I have only read the first two essays thus far. These essays are titled, “Reading” and “Writing.” The are not essays in the proper sense, rather they are mostly a series of wonderful aphorisms that build on one another with the occasional paragraph sandwiched between. And a meme. Or what could be a meme.

I realized after reading them that a good many of the aphorisms would make great writing prompts of a kind for blog posts. And that potential meme is also lurking. So you will see Auden quotes/prompts appearing now and then in the coming weeks.

For tonight’s inaugural, I chose something that wouldn’t take deep thought because it is Thursday and my brain power is waning. Without further ado, Mr. Auden will get me started:

Attacking bad books is not only a waste of time but also bad for the character. If I find a book really bad, the only interest I can derive from writing about it has to come from myself, from such display of intelligence, with and malice as I can contrive. One cannot review a bad book without showing off.

I have to admit that for the longest time I have been harboring a silent resentment against book review policies that refuse to review bad books. I figured that if a book is bad, I want to know it so I don’t buy it and waste both my time and money on it. Plus I thought that reviewers were somehow being overly concerned about being “nice.” If one reads a book and doesn’t like it, there is certainly a way to talk about it without being mean and snarky.

But Auden made the lightbulb go on. Oh, I get it! It’s not a matter of “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all” which would have surprised me, especially in America, especially from New York-based review sources. What it’s about is wasting space on a bad book when the space would be so much better utilized by an essay about a great book everyone should run to the library or bookstore and read.

Books appearing in reviews are being (mostly) recognized for their worthiness to be read. A book that doesn’t get reviewed, we might be able to assume, means that it is bad. Except that isn’t the case.

There are so many books that are published every year, even among the good ones a lot do not get reviewed. Then there is the gender bias to consider. Books by men generally get reviewed more often than books by women. And books by minorities and books in translation, well they are reviewed even less frequently. So we can’t assume that because a book doesn’t get reviewed it is a bad book.

The only thing we can say about books that do get reviewed under a “we don’t write about bad books policy” is that they probably aren’t bad. About the books that don’t get reviewed, we are on our own. One of the wonderful things about so many bloggers writing about books is that they tend to fill in some of the gaps left by the big professional reviews.

Now, whether attacking a bad book is bad for the character, I suppose it could be. Bad books do make easy targets though and I can understand how it would be tempting to write about them in order to show off. And in showing off, one can begin to feel superior which could lead to all kinds of ugly places if a reviewer is the sort with a big ego.

So there it is. My silent resentment is no longer silent and no longer a resentment. I get the don’t write about bad books thing now. I may be slow sometimes, but I usually arrive eventually.